• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Congress to get Obamacare exemption: report

MaggieD

Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2010
Messages
43,244
Reaction score
44,659
Location
Chicago Area
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
Ever notice how these stories are always reported on Friday?

By Michael Kitchen
LOS ANGELES (MarketWatch) -- The White House has approved a deal that will exempt members of Congress and their staff from some of the provisions of the Affordable Care Act, Politico reported late Thursday. Under the law, popularly referred to as Obamacare, lawmakers and their aides were required to source health insurance "created" by the law or offered through one of its exchanges, and without the subsidies they currently enjoy, the members of Congress would have faced thousands of dollars in additional premium payments each year, the report said. However, the Office of Personnel Management now plans to rule that the government can continue to make a contribution to the health-care premiums of the lawmakers and their staff, it said, citing unnamed congressional sources and a White House official.
Congress to get Obamacare exemption: report - MarketWatch
 

Naptyme

Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2012
Messages
206
Reaction score
119
Location
Mississippi
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Isn't this old news? I remember hearing they were exempt from it a long time ago. Its just like the gun control laws they want in place. If they are going to put laws in place they should not be able to exempt themselves, if its good for us then it should be good for them as well.
 

CanadaJohn

Canadian Conservative
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 27, 2013
Messages
28,627
Reaction score
20,383
Location
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Ever notice how these stories are always reported on Friday?



Congress to get Obamacare exemption: report - MarketWatch
I wonder if the Obama's now, and when the President leaves office, will be shopping the exchanges for coverage or will they have a gold-plated plan for life?

Never doubt that a socialist in a leadership position will preach to the masses what they deserve and grab for himself, in the dark corners of power, all that he can.
 

ttwtt78640

Sometimes wrong
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
66,483
Reaction score
37,751
Location
Uhland, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Ever notice how these stories are always reported on Friday?



Congress to get Obamacare exemption: report - MarketWatch
Remember that "saving money" by lowering health care costs was the stated goal of the PPACA law. Why would Obama not want to save the taxpayers all of that money? ;)

The more we learn of "what's in the bill" the less popular it becomes. Naturally, King Barrack, is able to "fine tune" the implementation of the PPACA law all by using his own magical executive powers. The unions (public and private) are now very upset as they have supposedly lost their ability to offer "better" medical insurance plans to their members. That equal treatment under the law is most inconvenient for the friends of Barrack, so it must be waived, out of "fairness", of course.
 

MaggieD

Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2010
Messages
43,244
Reaction score
44,659
Location
Chicago Area
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
Remember that "saving money" by lowering health care costs was the stated goal of the PPACA law. Why would Obama not want to save the taxpayers all of that money? ;)

The more we learn of "what's in the bill" the less popular it becomes. Naturally, King Barrack, is able to "fine tune" the implementation of the PPACA law all by using his own magical executive powers. The unions (public and private) are now very upset as they have supposedly lost their ability to offer "better" medical insurance plans to their members. That equal treatment under the law is most inconvenient for the friends of Barrack, so it must be waived, out of "fairness", of course.
The one thing that has me wondering about the whole shootin' match is why!!! is it taking until October 1st to see the rates? You can bet those rates are already in place and have been for some time.
 

ttwtt78640

Sometimes wrong
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
66,483
Reaction score
37,751
Location
Uhland, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
The one thing that has me wondering about the whole shootin' match is why!!! is it taking until October 1st to see the rates? You can bet those rates are already in place and have been for some time.
The same reason that the employer mandate was put "on hold"; once the true financial impact of PPACA is seen the less popular its (all demorat) supporters will be at the polls. Imagine the headlines if our congress critters had to admit that PPACA required them to spend more tax money on their own staffs. Better to punish only those "greedy" private employers and add tax payer subsidies for the "little guy"; PPACA is all about income reddistribution and more federal control of "private" medical care insurance.

It makes ZERO difference what medical care insurance premiums actually cost to those that pay a fixed amount (2% to 4%) of their AGI at the exchanges. By causing "private" medical care insurance premiums rates to rise, it is hoped the pressure will mount for the huge nanny state to come to the rescue to fix the problem, that it helped to create. ;)
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
75,601
Reaction score
33,228
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Am I reading this wrong? It sounds like this isn't an exemption, rather just a ruling that federal health benefits do, in fact, apply to purchasing insurance on the new exchange.

So, to clarify:

Congress and their aids are not "exempt" from Obamacare. They never have been. What came up recently was that while Congress and their aids were required by Obamacare to participate in the newly-created exchanges, it wasn't clear that the current health care subsidies that all federal employees get would be applicable to the exchange. There wasn't a clear ruling that they were allowed to apply that subsidy to the new exchanges.

This report clarifies that yes, they can do that. They get the same benefits as before, and are still required to purchase a plan on the new exchanges.

Somebody explain to me the problem.
 
Last edited:

BWG

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 29, 2005
Messages
4,373
Reaction score
1,602
Location
South Coast
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Am I reading this wrong? It sounds like this isn't an exemption, rather just a ruling that federal health benefits do, in fact, apply to purchasing insurance on the new exchange.

So, to clarify:

Congress and their aids are not "exempt" from Obamacare. They never have been. What came up recently was that while Congress and their aids were required by Obamacare to participate in the newly-created exchanges, it wasn't clear that the current health care subsidies that all federal employees get would be applicable to the exchange. There wasn't a clear ruling that they were allowed to apply that subsidy to the new exchanges.

This report clarifies that yes, they can do that. They get the same benefits as before, and are still required to purchase a plan on the new exchanges.

Somebody explain to me the problem.
Exactly. Here's an article from fact check back in May.

Members of Congress and their staffs would be the only employees of a large employer in the exchanges...
[...]
The concern, as a Roll Call story explained, was that the government wouldn’t be able to make contributions toward the federal employees’ premiums, at least at the beginning of 2014. That would mean employees would pick up the whole tab for their insurance policies. Right now, the government pays 72 percent of premiums on average.


Congress and an Exemption from ‘Obamacare’? | FactCheck.org
The exchange wasn't intended to be for companies that already provided health coverage for their employees. So, how did Congress get put in the exchange?

Why, like other parts of Obamacare, it was a Republican idea....LOL...:lol:


Here’s how it happened: Back during the Affordable Care Act negotiations, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) proposed an amendment forcing all members of Congress and all of their staffs to enter the exchanges. The purpose of the amendment was to embarrass the Democrats. But in a bit of jujitsu of which they were inordinately proud, Democrats instead embraced the amendment and added it to the law.


No, Congress isn’t trying to exempt itself from Obamacare
 

tererun

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 19, 2012
Messages
4,905
Reaction score
1,577
Location
The darkside of the moon
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Other
Ever notice how these stories are always reported on Friday?



Congress to get Obamacare exemption: report - MarketWatch
You know what is really amazing? When your own source seems to contradict itself.

On Obamacare, Congress didn't really get an exemption - Health Exchange - MarketWatch
What’s not well understood is the origin of this ruling. Uniquely, lawmakers and their aides had to get insurance “created” by the Affordable Care Act or “offered through an exchange.” This provision — stuck into the Affordable Care Act by Sen. Chuck Grassley, an Iowa Republican, basically as an intended poison pill — only applied to Congress and to no one else.
That is still the case. The current plans go away. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi issued a statement Thursday night saying lawmakers and their staffs must enroll in an exchange by Oct. 1.

The ruling by the OPM means that the government will contribute to those plans — just as it does now, and just as most private-sector employees have their health insurance paid for, in part or in whole, by their employers.
They are not getting exempt from the health insurance plans created by Obamacare implementation and getting their old insurance. they are getting employer contributions for it (Being the US government) to pay for their new insurance under Obamacare. About the only annoying thing about this is that they did away with the employer mandate for a year which they just got their employer to pay for health insurance. of course, that is the same for most people who already had employer health insurance paid for. It is only really unfair to the percentage of full time people who would have had gotten coverage a year sooner because of the employer mandate, but I do not see any reason why employers could not start paying a year earlier for all their employees like the US government is.
 
Top Bottom